Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Does Occupy Wall Street Have a Free Speech Right to Sleep in the Park?

By Mike Dorf

Last week I fielded a call from a reporter who was interested in the question of whether the Occupy Wall Street protesters would have a First Amendment right to remain in Zuccotti Park in the event that either Brookfield Properties (the property's owner) or the city were to try to evict them. My answer, in a nutshell, went like this:

1) A threshold question is whether to treat Zuccotti Park as a public forum or, if not, whether First Amendment protections apply in light of the character of the public easement that the city extracted from Brookfield in exchange for its development rights.

2) Assuming that the First Amendment does apply, the protesters could be subject to content-neutral, reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions. Preserving a park for competing uses in addition to protests would ordinarily count as reasonable. It would be unreasonable for a city to deny the organizers of a march or a rally a permit to hold that rally or permit on a mutually agreeable time and in a mutually agreeable place, but it would be reasonable to deny the organizers of a march or rally a permit to hold the march or rally every day for a period of months, if the march or rally effectively crowded out all other uses of the public property in question.

3) Thus, if litigation were to arise, I could well see the city prevailing if OWS insisted on staying in Zuccotti Park. However, given the large number of alternative public spaces in NYC, OWS would not need to apply to use Zuccotti Park. I would conservatively estimate that there must be at least 30 venues in NYC that would be appropriate sites for the OWS protest, so the protesters could apply to use each site no more than once per month and each day announce where the protest is going next. It would be unreasonable to deny the organizers of a protest or rally the right to use a public space for just one day per month.

4) The difficulty with this "moveable feast" approach is that the protesters would need to disperse each night. Thus far, a substantial core group has been sleeping in Zuccotti Park, but once they move to other parks, they could be subject to the city's 1 am park curfew and prohibition on camping in the city parks. For a fuller description of the law governing such matters, I recommend this excellent post from the NYCLU. The short of it is that under the Supreme Court's 1984 ruling in Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence (CCNV), a prohibition on sleeping in a public park will be upheld. As the NYCLU post notes, there may be circumstances in which CCNV can be distinguished, but OWS does not appear to present them. If anything, the protesters in CCNV had a stronger claim than OWS, because the former, but not the latter, aimed to dramatize the plight of the homeless by sleeping outdoors. Thus, for CCNV, sleeping in the park was itself a form of expression. Some OWS protesters may have that goal in mind, but mostly they want to sleep outdoors (or in tents in the park) just to keep the protest going. Because CCNV lost, it seems likely that OWS would lose on its weaker right-to-sleep-in-the-parks claim.

5) Should a legal confrontation result in a new regime in which OWS would have to disband each night and reassemble at a new site each morning, that would undoubtedly sap some of the strength of OWS, but it might not be so bad. Most of the protesters are sufficiently local to go home each night, and given the cooperative spirit of the event, those who have traveled from out of town would likely be given couch space on which to crash. There would be issues about where to store donated food and other supplies, but there also would be less of a need for some of these supplies. Indeed, an excuse to go indoors each night could actually be a boon for the protesters, many of whom might find their spirits flagging as the temperature drops.

6) That said, I am not happy with the decision in CCNV or its evident application to bar "camping" by groups like OWS. The notion of semi-permanently "occupying" a public space for political purposes is both a throwback to a much earlier American tradition of "mobbing," (celebrated by Larry Kramer in his book The People Themselves)and a self-conscious reproduction of the occupation of Tahrir Square and other places occupied during the Arab Spring. As mobs go, OWS is a phenomenally non-violent entity, and thus poses little threat to the public safety. It is not exactly a march or a rally, and thus permits for marches and rallies are not quite adequate substitutes for the occupation activity. Accordingly, if I were writing on a clean slate, I would want the First Amendment to protect OWS either in its current site or on a substitute city park, for as long as the protesters want to stay.

WOW GoldThus, if lawsuits were to develop, I could well see the metropolis existing if OWS was adamant on being in Zuccotti Store. However, given the many different open areas in NYC, OWS would not need to submit an application to use Zuccotti Store. I would conservatively calculate that there must be at least 30 places in NYC that would be appropriate web pages for the OWS demonstrate, so the demonstrators could submit an application to use each website no more than once a 30 days and each day say where the demonstrate is going next.英文seo It would be uncommon to reject the managers of a demonstrate or move the right to use a open room for just one day a 30 days.seo

Most of the protesters are sufficiently local to go home each night, and given the cooperative spirit of the event, those who have traveled from out of town would likely be given couch space on which to crash. There would be issues about where to store donated food and other supplies, but there also would be less of a need for some of these supplies. Indeed, an excuse to go indoors each night could actually be a boon for the protesters, many of whom might find their spirits flagging as the temperature drops.Buy Cheap Windows 7 KeyWindows 7 ultimate KeyWindows 7 professional KeyWindows 7 Key

Pet dog fashion wouldn't be complete without the dog clothes. Today, you can choose from a wide variety of dog clothing types. For fashion-forward dog owners, grab a couple of fancy collars adorned with glitters, sequins, or rhinestones. If you're a no-fuss dog owner, you can opt for a simple yet sturdy dog clothes that comes with an ID tag. Before you grab a collar for your pet, make sure that it'll fit your dog just right. To get the right size, measure your dog's neck and add just an inch. Including an allowance into the actual measurement is one good way of getting dog clothing that's not too tight or too loose.By Author:http://www.lovelonglong.com

Something else to remember how to make many for cheap rs gold cooking, when you're talking with non player characters throughout the game, you must checks to see if they have any recipes for runescape money sale.

Many of us attemptedto stability the needs of Guild Wars 2 Gold, the actual narrator, and also players. Goal to generate an easy to use method, but simultaneously to generate a challenging to grasp your specialized Buy D3 Gold, in order that professional gamers get pleasure from demonstrating their particular competence associated with criteria.

Anticipating a few days at the start of E3 in Los Angeles, Konami held a press conference in which he displayed three of its most anticipated titles. Specifically, we have the spectacular V Metal Gear Solid: The rs gold buying Phantom Pain, which will feature the voice of veteran actor Kiefer Shuterland in the role of Big Boss, the ambitious Castlevania: Lords of Shadow 2, which will put us in the shoes of Dracula the modern age, and the new edition of its sports series PES 2014, which will feature the Fox Engine graphics engine developed by Kojima team Productions.Pod is enjoy this full press conference with subtitles runescape gold for sale in Castilian through the video that included in this news noticia.